Introduction

This document outlines a set of co-created departmental classroom recommendations from neurodivergent (ND) and disabled students in our department. Stephanie Li, Maria Khandaker, and Brianna Wedderburn (under the supervision of Dr. Debra Bercovici),  led community focus groups and interviews exploring students’ social/communication, executive functioning, and sensory needs, as well as defining what accessibility and inclusion for neurodivergent students could look like compared to what it currently looks like in their classrooms. Stephanie Li additionally conducted a course audit for psychology courses offered during the 2023-2024 academic year to identify instances of harm (e.g., stereotypical presentations, ableism, a lack of accessibility) perpetuated through course readings and course structures.

Ultimately, this chapter of the handbook seeks to provide UTSC Psychology instructors and other student-interfacing staff members with a community-driven understanding of how to better support ND and disabled students. The current iteration of this chapter focuses primarily on disability through an ND lens, with the intention of expanding to include more specific examples pertaining to other disabled identities in the future.

Identity First vs. Person First Language

When discussing identity, disability, and neurodivergence, there are broadly two approaches to referring to an individual and their identity. Person-first language refers to a person before their disability using phrases like “I am a person with autism”. Identity-first language instead refers to an individual’s identity first, using phrases like “I am autistic”.

Each approach highlights different aspects of the experience of being disabled, and this distinction is up to individuals to decide for themselves. However, the disabled and neurodivergent community as a whole advocates for the use of identity-first language. For example, individuals with lived experience of autism largely prefer identity-first language,  whereas those outside the community, including healthcare professionals, prefer person-first language (Taboas et al., 2022). In the interest of using community-defined language, this chapter predominantly uses identity-first language.

Visible vs. Invisible Disabilities

The visibility of one’s disability can be an important factor to understand when approaching the experiences of neurodivergent and disabled individuals. It is important to recognize that while the experiences and identities of individuals with visible and invisible disabilities are equally valid, visibility can have large implications on the unique barriers, discrimination, and social attitudes that individuals face.

Visible disabilities are those that are apparent to others. This can often include, but is not restricted to, physical characteristics or noticeable impairments. Individuals with visible disabilities often do not have the choice of non-disclosure, and may face persistent stigma, discrimination, exclusion, and/or other negative social attitudes as a result of their immediately apparent disability.

Invisible disabilities are those that are not immediately apparent to others. This can often include, but is not restricted to, neurodivergence and/or sensory and processing differences. In addition to facing stigma and discrimination, individuals with invisible disabilities may face invalidation, disbelief, and skepticism when choosing to disclose their disability or seek accommodation.

Important Terms to Know

• Neurodiversity: A social movement and ideology that recognizes how neurodiversity is part of biodiversity. This ideology contrasts the medical model of disability [defined below] in that it acknowledges how all neurotypes [defined below] have strengths and weaknesses in any given situation, but neurotypical norms privilege one neurotype over another.

• Neurodivergent: A term describing individuals who exhibit brain differences that do not match the societal norm. Some neurodivergent individuals may have an official diagnosis like ADHD, autism, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, dyslexia or a learning disability while others may not. Neurodivergent people benefit from accommodations in neurotypical environments (e.g., in university classrooms).

• Neurotypical: A term describing individuals who do not exhibit brain differences from the norm, and whose brains tend to process information similarly. Neurotypical people form the majority of people worldwide, and most systems in our world were designed by neurotypical people. Neurotypical people experience neurotypical privilege. In the classroom, this means recognizing that course structures were created for and by neurotypical people.

• Neurotype: A term describing a category of neural processing patterns. Within these categories, people are relatively similar to each other in how their brains process information. “Neurotypical” and “autistic” are examples of neurotypes.

• Ableism: Discrimination faced by neurodivergent and disabled folks.

• Medical Model of Disability: A model of disability that views an individual’s disability as an individual deficit that impacts their quality of life. This model aims to diagnose and subsequently treat, cure, or eliminate disability in an attempt to allow disabled individuals to lead a “normal” life. The medical model of disability remains prevalent in academic and healthcare settings.

• Social Model of Disability: A model that views disability as the result of societal barriers, discrimination, and inadequate support, rather than an individual’s impairments. This model distinguishes between disability (the challenges imposed by society) and impairment (an individual’s attributes). It emphasizes that individuals with impairments experience disability only because society fails to meet their needs equitably. The model advocates for removing structural barriers to enable independent and equal participation in society. It also highlights how societal inclusivity can reshape perceptions of impairment. For example, while poor vision is considered an impairment, widespread access to prescription glasses prevents it from generally being viewed as a disability.

• Masking/Camouflaging: Terms describing a strategy consciously or subconsciously used by some neurodivergent individuals to conceal characteristics of neurodivergence to appear as neurotypical. Masking can allow individuals to blend in and face greater acceptance within neurotypical society, but can lead to stress, exhaustion, and a sense of disconnect from one’s identity (Miller et al., 2021). In the classroom, this means that neurodivergent students who are struggling may not always appear as such.

Current Climate

The section below explores the current environment surrounding how neurodiversity is discussed, perceived, and supported within the UTSC Psychology Department. The student-led initiatives outlined in this section investigate this topic from a community-driven lens, drawing upon the frameworks and findings of neurodivergence-informed research and the lived experiences of neurodivergent and disabled students in our department.

Community-Led Focused Groups

Neurodivergent and disabled students identified the following themes related to our department’s classroom (in)accessibility and harmful narratives:

Inaccessible Course Policies & Content

Neurodivergent students reported that course policies requiring in-class participation marks often failed to accommodate for their differences in processing times, thereby barring them from opportunities to apply their knowledge. This was especially difficult when lecture content was not available before class.

• “Processing takes time and so it might be hard to participate in class when you’re taking a long time to form your thoughts – this makes it harder for me to get participation marks, and perpetuates the belief that you don’t have useful things to say.”
• “Supplementary videos, slides before lectures, posters and different forms of media/opportunities to apply knowledge in general would probably benefit everyone, and this is likely the easiest implementation while we wait for better accessibility services staffing.”

Students also reported that a lack of consistency in how course content was posted made it difficult for them to keep track of announcements and deadlines. Additionally, a lack of transparency in expectations and grading schemes made it difficult for students to excel in assessments.

• “Consistency and reliability for announcements would be nice – sometimes they are in a lecture, sometimes they’re in a Quercus announcement, or the course home page, sometimes it’s an email – this is super frustrating if you forget a date, or know something that has changed but can’t remember where you saw it.”
• “Currently, every course is set up differently and so you have to navigate an unstandardized page. Each professor has a different way they’d like to post content, how they’d prefer your email subject line to look, etc – this requires a lot of extra effort to remember, especially when you have to navigate across different pages to find it.”
• “Also, having clear instructions for everything would be nice. Rubrics, clarity in syllabi and easily/consistently organized Quercus pages would be nice to have a general idea of the format of the course.
• “Clear and concise instructions on what you actually need to learn and will be tested on vs. what is just interesting would be very helpful, as we can have a hard time differentiating unless it is explicitly stated.”

Accessibility Needs Not Being Met

Students reported facing numerous barriers in acquiring accommodations through AccessAbility services and support through other campus services. The lack of awareness from course instructors about these issues was further invalidating and discouraging.

• “[Professors] do not understand how broken the current accessibility system is. It is a super dehumanizing process […] It can even be traumatizing.”
• “We need an awareness from profs that disability fluctuates”
• “It’s normally difficult to get accommodations during exams. We must do it multiple times a semester and it is exhausting.”
• “Even asking for permission to push a deadline can take months within the current system and this becomes more stressful for the student.”
• “[Students] often get their accommodations approved, but cannot actually get them enforced during the exam. […] Better communication between accessibility and facilitators would help ensure that we are actually getting our accommodations without having to also focus on trying to get them met during exams.”

Inaccessible Learning Environments and A Lack of Online Options

Students reported that physical class environments and campus spaces were often inaccessible, and did not accommodate for fidgeting, movement, and sensory needs. In facing these barriers, they expressed the need for online options for lectures.

• “The physical environment would benefit from more lighting options for photosensitive people – adjustable light intensity/colour.”
• “Bigger tables that aren’t attached to the chair for class – a moving/rickety table is very distracting while you’re trying to take notes.”
• “Moving things online helps folks navigate course content on their own time without having to go through the process of diagnosis/accommodations which is helpful for undiagnosed people.”
• “Web options need to be mandatory for all classes. Because we had COVID, everything is already recorded, so even if the classes are too small to record new content now, [professors] can still post old content for those who cannot attend class in person now. Also good for revision.”

Harmful Language & Pathologizing Narratives

Students reported that class materials used harmful and pathologizing narratives surrounding neurodivergent individuals, autism, and ADHD. In failing to address this, or explicitly operating under these frameworks, course instructors were perpetuating harmful stereotypes and stigma towards neurodivergent individuals.

• “There’s a harmful trend where profs talk about mentally ill individuals flippantly, psychoanalyzing them without understanding nuances or intersectional lived experiences.”
• “The ‘importance’ or severity of illnesses in textbooks [is] being judged based on the visibility of symptoms. This influences how we are treated when we need accommodations”
• “All stigmatizing material and language that pits students against groups with mental health issues should be denounced/critically analyzed, especially hot topics such as narcissistic personality disorder, schizophrenia, ADHD, autism or borderline personality disorder.”
• “Content related to Autism and ADHD should be co-developed with neurodivergent people, and more time and effort should be dedicated to intersectional research/diversity initiatives.”

Student-Led Audit of Autism-Related Content in our Psychology Courses

Sixteen psychology courses offered through our department were examined based on the ways in which autism was discussed in course readings. All courses that discussed autism contained only pathologizing narratives. These data serve as examples of how students are being taught about neurodivergent identities in ways that are harmful.  Examples of pathologizing themes are discussed below:

False Ideas on the Presentation of Autism

Autism was discussed as more commonly found in boys, and/or that autism is a disorder of childhood. These notions perpetuate harmful ideas that are used to invalidate the experiences of autistic people and create further barriers to acquiring accommodations and support.

Deficit-Based Definitions of Autism

Autistic people are presented as struggling to develop theory of mind. Theory of mind places the burden of empathy and understanding between autistic and neurotypical people entirely on those with autism, despite this lack of understanding being bi-directional. In doing so, it dehumanizes autistic people and perpetuates the notion that they are incapable of empathy.

Autism was often presented solely on the basis of deficit-based traits, such as difficulties with facial recognition. These framings, which view autism as a purely undesirable deficit, rather than a natural variation in neurotypes, provide justification for the treatment and eradication of autism.

Autism as a Deficit to be Treated and Eliminated

Materials from three courses presented Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) as the best method for “treating” Autism. However, autistic people have reported traumatizing experiences undergoing ABA that undermined their autonomy and forced them to “mask” (i.e., altering their behaviour to appear to be neurotypical) to fit into an ableist society (Chapman & Botha, 2023).

Recommendations

Classroom Policies

Incorporate Universal Instructional Design into Course Material

Universal Instructional Design (UID) is a framework for designing teaching materials that ensures that accessibility is proactive, inclusive, and sustainable. More information on the principles of UID and suggestions for their implementation can be found in Part III of this handbook.

Consider the following in making  materials accessible to neurodiverse students:

• Break course content/concepts into smaller parts, as some neurodivergent and disabled students can get easily overwhelmed by the amount of information presented to them.
• Provide alternative formats for class participation and assignments (e.g., posters, video submissions).
• State assignment expectations clearly and concisely in rubrics.
• Explicitly state what material will be testable in assessments vs. material that is simply interesting or helpful, as neurodivergent students can have a hard time differentiating them.
• Maintain a structured and organized Quercus page with consistency in posting location and time for announcements, assignments, readings, etc.

Create a Universal and Proactive System for Accommodations

Implementing proactive accommodations through universal course policies can provide all students with a greater opportunity and flexibility in their learning and options for participation. While these practices benefit all students, and are intended to co-exist with individualized accommodations, they can be especially helpful for neurodivergent and disabled students who face barriers in receiving accommodations through AccessAbility Services.

Consider implementing the following universal course policies:

• Post lecture slides and readings ahead of time, as this information may take longer to internalize for individuals with differences in processing times.
• Provide students with a standardized  “grace period” for all assignments in which late submissions will not be penalized.
• Provide students with a pre-authorized standard extension that can be used once throughout the semester.
• Create opportunities for students to make up for lost marks through supplementary activities or assessments.
• Provide online alternatives to lecture participation through recordings of current or past lectures.
• Provide students with premade lecture notes, study guides, and/or practice questions.

Foster a Safe, Inclusive, and Respectful Classroom Environment

Adapting to the systematic barriers that neurodivergent and disabled students face in post-secondary education can be a difficult and traumatizing experience. Requesting accommodations can be an additionally daunting experience for neurodivergent and disabled students, and they can often feel burdensome when making their requests. These issues can be exacerbated when students perceive an underrepresentation of neurodivergent and disabled folks in academia, especially with its current strictness and alignment with neurotypical and non-disabled values. In creating a safe, inclusive, and respectful learning environment for neurodivergent students, consider the following:

• Make an in-class statement for accessibility and accommodations discussing any class policies you have in place to support students with accessibility needs.
• Ensure students don’t feel the need to constantly ask to receive accommodations that they already requested at the beginning of the term.
• Self-disclosure of disabled or neurodivergent identity (when applicable, and at one’s own discretion) to express solidarity and signal safety and understanding.
• Respect student confidentiality of identity – do not ask students why they have an accommodation and do not highlight particular students who have accommodations or who have disclosed a disability to you.
• Remember that not everyone with a disability presents the same way – trust students who disclose neurodivergence, disability, or accommodation needs to you.

Course Content

Replace Pathologizing Narratives with Neurodivergence-Informed Frameworks, Lived Experience, and Community Voices

Course materials that focus on deficit-based definitions of neurodivergence, describe it through pathological terms, or highlight a need to “treat” it perpetuate harmful narratives and stereotypes against neurodivergent individuals. In contrast to these pathology-centred paradigms, the neurodiversity paradigm, and other neurodivergence-informed frameworks view neurodiversity as a natural difference in neurotypes, or an aspect of intersectional identity, rather than a deficit in capabilities.

• Feature literature and models of neurodivergence informed by neurodivergent and disabled individuals.
• Invite scholars and members of the community to speak about their lived experiences and perspectives on what it is like to be disabled.
• If course materials with harmful narratives cannot be replaced, actively make a classroom statement discussing their harmful impact and present neurodivergence-informed alternative positions.
• Ensure that content does not come from outdated sources, especially if they were written or spoken upon by non-disabled or neurotypical individuals who may lack the lived experiences and accurate perspective on what it is like to be disabled.

Here are some frameworks that are worth including in your psychology curriculum that were conceptualized by neurodivergent individuals:

• The Neurodiversity Paradigm:

The social movement and ideology that recognizes how neurodiversity is part of biodiversity. This ideology contrasts the medical model of disability in that it acknowledges how all neurotypes have strengths and weaknesses in any given situation, but neurotypical norms privilege one neurotype over another.

• The Double Empathy Problem:

The theory that the lack of empathy/theory of mind often attributed to autistic people is not a unilateral deficit of autistic individuals, but a bidirectional issue between autistic and non-autistic individuals. In other words, both non-autistic and autistic individuals largely struggle to understand and empathize with each other as a result of their differing neurotypes.

• Monotropism:

A thinking and processing style in which an individual focuses their attention deeply on a single or small number of interests at any given time, rather than spread their attention across a broader range of things less deeply. Monotropism can explain a large number of the processing differences found in neurodivergent individuals and is hypothesized to be a common underlying feature of autism and ADHD.

Avoid Perpetuating Ableist Stereotypes

Pathologizing narratives commonly perpetuate ableist stereotypes about neurodivergent and disabled individuals. When discussing relevant topics, ensure that you avoid perpetuating these harmful ideas.

Some common stereotypes perpetuated against neurodivergent people:

• Autistic people:
  • Do not express emotion
  • Do not interact socially with others
  • Are always non-verbal
  • Are always reclusive

• People with ADHD:
  • Are constantly unable to focus on tasks or what people are trying to say
  • Are constantly moving about physically
  • Are loud and disruptive with an inability to control their impulses
  • Are lazy and procrastinate

• Tourettes Syndrome:
  • Often use slurs or curse words
  • Are constantly in a state of tics
  • Often use inappropriate gestures

Beyond the Classroom

Hire Neurodivergent and Disabled Students to Work on Related Projects

Prioritize hiring neurodivergent and disabled students in roles focused on neurodivergence and disability-related research or assisting neurodivergent and disabled students and/or staff members.

Remember that bringing disabled and neurodivergent students into a research space requires taking action toward inclusion and accessibility. Diversity is not inherently action towards accessibility. In creating an accessible and inclusive research environment for all students, consider the points below:

• Consider the principles of UID in research spaces, not just in the classroom.
• Avoid making assumptions about neurodivergent staff and their abilities in relation to job duties.
• Ask all students about access needs, regardless of knowledge about disability status. This normalizes the notion that all students can benefit from support without singling out or forcing disclosure from neurodivergent and disabled students.
• Make interviews flexible and accessible, as it can be very overwhelming for neurodivergent applicants and could pose accessibility issues for individuals who use wheelchairs and walkers/canes when conducting in-person interviews.
• Be open to different ways of communicating and communication needs (e.g., being direct and unambiguous with instructions and feedback; reading between the lines is not accessible).
• Provide definitions and reminders of academic jargon.
• Allow for flexibility with deadlines and expectations.

Complete Training on Topics of Neurodivergence and Disability

UofT Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) Office – Training

• This webpage from the UofT AODA Office lists resource and training sessions for promoting accessibility in the classroom

UofT Guide on Academic Accommodations

• This webpage from the UofT Office of Vice Provost, Students contains detailed information on the accommodation process, appropriate accommodations, and medical documentation.

UofT Resource Hub for Inclusive Teaching Practices

• This webpage from the UofT AccessAbility Office features resources on inclusive teaching practices with information on inclusive course planning, universal instructional design, and remote learning. This page also features information and policies regarding ableism and microaggressions in the university environment.

Check Your Understanding

References

Chapman, R., & Botha, M. (2023). Neurodivergence-informed therapy. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 65(3), 310–317. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.15384.

Miller, D., Rees, J., & Pearson, A. (2021). “Masking is life”: Experiences of masking in autistic and nonautistic adults. Autism in Adulthood, 3(4), 330–338. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2020.0083

Taboas, A., Doepke, K., & Zimmerman, C. (2022). Preferences for identity-first versus person-first language in a US sample of autism stakeholders. Autism, 27(2), 565–570. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613221130845

Contributions

Roles follow the CRediT Taxonomy. Names are listed in alphabetical order.

Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, and Methodology: Stephanie Li

Writing – Original draft: Amman Khurana, Stephanie Li, Mikayla Martin

Writing – Review & editing: Debra Bercovici, Amman Khurana

Supervision: Debra Bercovici

Funding Acquisition: Debra Bercovici, Kyle Danielson (PIE Funds)